.
Comments
-
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.0 -
No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this._____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women.
0 -
yes hollywood is run by men but lets not absolve the women involved. theyre not slaves... nor indentured workers(as far as I know). they had the choice to say yes or no... and they exercised that choice. on some level they all thought doing this movie was a good idea. personally I just don't see it as a particularly good opportunity for women. tho you never know.. perhaps in time we'll discover one of the actresses involved was able to bring an important piece of film making to fruition because of the pay packet she got by selling her soul doing ghostbusters. *shrugs*PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
Do you mean when an aspiring actress who makes millions clutches her award and spews during her acceptance speech that women are lesser in Hollywood and demand change?catefrances said:
yes hollywood is run by men but lets not absolve the women involved. theyre not slaves... nor indentured workers(as far as I know). they had the choice to say yes or no... and they exercised that choice. on some level they all thought doing this movie was a good idea. personally I just don't see it as a particularly good opportunity for women. tho you never know.. perhaps in time we'll discover one of the actresses involved was able to bring an important piece of film making to fruition because of the pay packet she got by selling her soul doing ghostbusters. *shrugs*PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.0 -
no but but i think once you've made millions and are standing on stage clutching an oscar, youre no longer aspiring.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Do you mean when an aspiring actress who makes millions clutches her award and spews during her acceptance speech that women are lesser in Hollywood and demand change?catefrances said:
yes hollywood is run by men but lets not absolve the women involved. theyre not slaves... nor indentured workers(as far as I know). they had the choice to say yes or no... and they exercised that choice. on some level they all thought doing this movie was a good idea. personally I just don't see it as a particularly good opportunity for women. tho you never know.. perhaps in time we'll discover one of the actresses involved was able to bring an important piece of film making to fruition because of the pay packet she got by selling her soul doing ghostbusters. *shrugs*PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
Let's see how many movies she will make after her "speech".catefrances said:
no but but i think once you've made millions and are standing on stage clutching an oscar, youre no longer aspiring.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Do you mean when an aspiring actress who makes millions clutches her award and spews during her acceptance speech that women are lesser in Hollywood and demand change?catefrances said:
yes hollywood is run by men but lets not absolve the women involved. theyre not slaves... nor indentured workers(as far as I know). they had the choice to say yes or no... and they exercised that choice. on some level they all thought doing this movie was a good idea. personally I just don't see it as a particularly good opportunity for women. tho you never know.. perhaps in time we'll discover one of the actresses involved was able to bring an important piece of film making to fruition because of the pay packet she got by selling her soul doing ghostbusters. *shrugs*PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.
I venture to say not many.
She is now become aspiring.0 -
are we speaking of someone specific???PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Let's see how many movies she will make after her "speech".catefrances said:
no but but i think once you've made millions and are standing on stage clutching an oscar, youre no longer aspiring.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Do you mean when an aspiring actress who makes millions clutches her award and spews during her acceptance speech that women are lesser in Hollywood and demand change?catefrances said:
yes hollywood is run by men but lets not absolve the women involved. theyre not slaves... nor indentured workers(as far as I know). they had the choice to say yes or no... and they exercised that choice. on some level they all thought doing this movie was a good idea. personally I just don't see it as a particularly good opportunity for women. tho you never know.. perhaps in time we'll discover one of the actresses involved was able to bring an important piece of film making to fruition because of the pay packet she got by selling her soul doing ghostbusters. *shrugs*PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Hollywood is run by elite men. Look at the latest Oscar fiasco.catefrances said:
what do you mean by that?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is a very bad marketing strategy to shove women full throttle into something they shouldn't be.catefrances said:
I don't see it as feminism.. regressive or otherwise. its just a marketing ploy. wow! look new ghostbusters with WOMEN! are we clever? aren't we being progressive and pro women? no youre not clever and no youre not being clever.. nor are you being pro women. youre thinking remaking a classic with the novelty of women will be enough to draw crowds(women) to the cinema. but I do appreciate you thinking we're stupid enough to fall for it... NOT.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I would like to know who makes those headlines too.mickeyrat said:
Right, as in we're guessing we'll make this amount based off the track record of a couple of the stars we lined up to act in the lead roles. Projected.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Projection is not accurate.mickeyrat said:Projected to make 154 million. THAT is why its being redone.
Can't wait to see the real results on opening day.
I'm slightly interested to know who exactly stated it was with a feminist agenda. Like who attached to the movie makes this assertion.
In fact no I am not. Its a fucking movie. Watch or dont.
Because of these headlines the movie will bomb.
Regressive feminism.
This movie will not do well.
I venture to say not many.
She is now become aspiring.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
My impression is you believe they arent up to the task as if they are incapable.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women._____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
No.mickeyrat said:
My impression is you believe they arent up to the task as if they are incapable.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women.
This movie is making aspiring actresses take on an insurmountable task.
0 -
I disagree. how could women be placated by the recasting of male roles simply to make a buck? its not as if the original idea was to remake it wth female leads... that scenario came about because bill murray very wisely said no... no doubt seeing zero merit in such an enterprise. tho I have no doubt there are women out there who will see it as a good thing. we need our own stories not rehashed male stories.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
So Melissa McCathy is apsiring huh? Bankable STAR. Kristen Wiig is great as well. I hardly would describe them as "aspiring" .PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
No.mickeyrat said:
My impression is you believe they arent up to the task as if they are incapable.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women.
This movie is making aspiring actresses take on an insurmountable task.
The definition of aspiring is looking forward to something with great desire, hoping for some dream or goal to come true, or working towards making something happen.
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
They each have done well alone.mickeyrat said:
So Melissa McCathy is apsiring huh? Bankable STAR. Kristen Wiig is great as well. I hardly would describe them as "aspiring" .PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
No.mickeyrat said:
My impression is you believe they arent up to the task as if they are incapable.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
I can't tell anymore if you are angry or just inquisitive.mickeyrat said:No tell us why they shouldnt be in something like this.
It is like BET, etc.
This movie has cast women to placate women.
This movie is making aspiring actresses take on an insurmountable task.
The definition of aspiring is looking forward to something with great desire, hoping for some dream or goal to come true, or working towards making something happen.
Putting them all together to celebrate will not work.
0 -
i am a guy. and i am a feminist."You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say0 -
Many examples of the cliche man in here, in control of the world and too afraid to give it up.
The reason Hollywood is dominated by men is because Hollywood is a sexist, rigged city. Take a look at how much men make compared to women there. It's time to change0 -
Awesome!
Our new Prime Minister
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-canada-united-nations-women-1.34941810 -
Plenty in church.JWPearl said:
i love insecure menrgambs said:
There are so many men who are so insecure...it is just nuts.catefrances said:
the rhetoric of anything can get too much.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is crazy to think that we still have people who truly believe that women are not equal.catefrances said:
the fetishisation of women continues.
its funny you know cause for the longest time I didn't consider myself a feminist cause ive always grown up with a strong sense of myself as female and my belief that simply because I didn't have a penis didn't mean I wasn't equal to males. ive never liked labels cause to me that smacks of conformity. I remember being younger(preteen) and being told girls don't play football but you can be a cheerleader. I thought why the fuck would I want to be a cheerleader... I want to play, not watch. talk about disillusion. and I definitely dont want to be shaking pom poms for anyone
It's sad.
Feminist is not a bad term to fall under. Hell I am one.
Just the rhetoric at times can be too much.
I do know that I wouldn't want a man shaking pom poms for me though
tho I have to say it amuses me no end how threatened some men get when confronted with a woman with strong opinions and convictions. rise up to my level, dont drag me down to yours...
such a turn on10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG0 -
In temples, mosques and other places of comfort and prayer for many as well?callen said:
Plenty in church.JWPearl said:
i love insecure menrgambs said:
There are so many men who are so insecure...it is just nuts.catefrances said:
the rhetoric of anything can get too much.PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
It is crazy to think that we still have people who truly believe that women are not equal.catefrances said:
the fetishisation of women continues.
its funny you know cause for the longest time I didn't consider myself a feminist cause ive always grown up with a strong sense of myself as female and my belief that simply because I didn't have a penis didn't mean I wasn't equal to males. ive never liked labels cause to me that smacks of conformity. I remember being younger(preteen) and being told girls don't play football but you can be a cheerleader. I thought why the fuck would I want to be a cheerleader... I want to play, not watch. talk about disillusion. and I definitely dont want to be shaking pom poms for anyone
It's sad.
Feminist is not a bad term to fall under. Hell I am one.
Just the rhetoric at times can be too much.
I do know that I wouldn't want a man shaking pom poms for me though
tho I have to say it amuses me no end how threatened some men get when confronted with a woman with strong opinions and convictions. rise up to my level, dont drag me down to yours...
such a turn on
There are men and women all over this earth who question themselves at times, or even often.
I have moments of insecurity too; who hasn't? And so what? Recognize it, learn from it, hopefully get over it, and move on.
Find a way.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149.1K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 283 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help